Some more meaningless rubbish about speed cameras.

This
press release from the Cambridge Safety Camera partnership announced in April
2002 that 100 people would be saved from death or serious injury by their
cameras. Assuming they meant the 523 recorded from 2001, they were predicting
that the totals for 2002 & 2003 would be 946 or lower, the actual total is
979, making them only 67% as effective as they predicted. If we'd assumed a
background falling trend of 5% pa which previously hasn't seemed unreasonable
then they've done 11 KSI worse than if they hadn't bothered. What does this
tell us? Well, the camera partnership utterly failed to meet their own
target in their first two years of operation, which is slightly suprising,
because even though their targets are based on ludicrously optimistic results
generated by poor statistics, they measure themselves by equally poor
statistics.

Why do we pay the council anyway?

It seems to me that the Safety Camera partnership should know how to
do their stats, has anyone else noticed they never include a correction for
changes to road layout - e.g. the massive pedestrian works at the Staples
roundabout in Cambridge. Presumably therefore the Safety Camera Partnership,
who really should know, don't believe it made any effect. Maybe we should
point that out to our local councillors?

Speed Camera Partnership promotes dangerous driving?

If I was the safety camera partnership I wouldn't put out this press release about people attempting to avoid prosecution by driving above the speed limit on the wrong side of the road.

Pc Paul Hine, enforcement officer for the Cambridgeshire Safety Camera
Partnership, said the number of people being caught by cameras on the wrong
side of the road was increasing.

To paraphrase, "We used to have a problem with people driving too fast round
these parts, now thanks to our camera they drive too fast on the wrong side
of the road. Aren't cameras great?"

For [insert deity of your choice]'s sake, these people employ a dedicated
public relations member of staff. Surely they must have vetted that release?

Charging for Evidence

I've heard anecdotes that should you be caught by a mobile camera
that uses a video recorder, the police have now started charging to take a
copy of the tape that you were caught on. Conicidentally the cost of the
police duplicating the tape is around £60,
roughly the same as the fine for speeding in the first place. If the tape
shows proves your innocence then the police will drop the case, but it's
not clear if they'll refund the 'charge' for obtaining the evidence.